Home > Public >  Attorney Search > Attorney Profile

Attorney Search


Richard D Ackerman - #171900

Attorney Provided Information

The information below was provided by the attorney and has not been verified or monitored. The State Bar does not recommend or endorse any attorney.

Practice Area(s):
Business Law
Civil Rights
Commercial Law
Constitutional Law


Current Status:  Not eligible to practice law (Not Entitled)

See below for more details.

Profile Information

The following information is from the official records of The State Bar of California.

Bar Number: 171900
Law Offices of R.D. Ackerman
27638 Moonridge Dr
Menifee, CA 92585
Map it
Phone Number: (951) 231-8841
Fax Number: Not Available
e-mail: bgpf@fyictsg.eduhymw@ddrperh.orgooinpahde@phfyiy.eduwgfgnwllr@oiywolyh.netconsiglierea@aol.comlowokqug@mljkrcmo.comsgrhinbo@ujkeq.netbwoahlf@yfi.orginkpfij@mnglp.orgpfgieg@rcwfli.orgwwdbce@dogdmcj.netfnyqab@meocmthl.edumftjy@duryanng.edusupcu@hghgyohe.govciama@imjjnywf.comtqdtcb@dubp.govmbheed@shq.edufiklfgt@riswq.orgyqoshio@eat.govpbsdilk@pqwtgo.gov 
Undergraduate School:
Western State Univ; Fullerton CA
Law School:
Western State Univ COL; Fullerton CA
County: Riverside
District: District 4

Status History

Effective Date Status Change
Present Not Eligible To Practice Law
11/24/2014 Not Eligible To Practice Law  
11/23/1994 Admitted to The State Bar of California

Explanation of member status

Actions Affecting Eligibility to Practice Law

Effective DateDescriptionCase NumberResulting Status

Disciplinary and Related Actions

Overview of the attorney discipline system.

3/8/2015 Discipline w/actual suspension 14-PM-04575 Not Eligible To Practice Law 
12/25/2014 Ordered inactive 14-PM-04575 Not Eligible To Practice Law 
11/24/2014 Suspended, failed to pass Prof.Resp.Exam 12-O-13461 Not Eligible To Practice Law 
8/27/2014 Petition/Application/Motion filed in SBCt 14-PM-04575  
9/27/2013 Discipline, probation; no actual susp. 12-O-13461  

Administrative Actions

This member has no public record of administrative actions.

Copies of official attorney discipline records are available upon request.

Explanation of common actions

State Bar Court Cases

NOTE: The State Bar Court began posting public discipline documents online in 2005. The format and pagination of documents posted on this site may vary from the originals in the case file as a result of their translation from the original format into Word and PDF. Copies of additional related documents in a case are available upon request. Only Opinions designated for publication in the State Bar Court Reporter may be cited or relied on as precedent in State Bar Court proceedings. For further information about a case that is displayed here, please refer to the State Bar Court's online docket, which can be found at: http://apps.statebarcourt.ca.gov/dockets/dockets.aspx

DISCLAIMER: Any posted Notice of Disciplinary Charges, Conviction Transmittal or other initiating document, contains only allegations of professional misconduct. The attorney is presumed to be innocent of any misconduct warranting discipline until the charges have been proven.

Effective Date Case Number Description
3/8/2015 14-PM-4575 Stipulation [PDF]
9/27/2013 12-O-13461 Stipulation [PDF] [HTML]

California Bar Journal Discipline Summaries

Summaries from the California Bar Journal are based on discipline orders but are not the official records. Not all discipline actions have associated CBJ summaries. Copies of official attorney discipline records are available upon request.

September 27, 2013

RICHARD D. ACKERMAN [#171900], 44, of Riverside, was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on two years’ probation and ordered to take the MPRE. The order took effect Sept. 27, 2013.

Ackerman stipulated that he failed to respond promptly to reasonable status inquiries of a client, inform his client of significant developments in his case or to perform legal services with competence.

Ackerman was hired in 2007 to represent the plaintiff in a construction defect matter. After the client lost the case, he asked Ackerman to file an appeal. Despite telling the client he would file the appeal on Jan. 1, 2012, Ackerman did not file it and ignored repeated emails from the client. The deadline for filing an appeal in the civil matter ultimately passed, but Ackerman did not inform the client that he had missed the deadline.

In mitigation, Ackerman had no prior record of discipline, cooperated with the State Bar, presented a number of character references and participated in a number of civic and pro bono activities.

Start New Search »